Raleigh's race to the bottom

Published: Sunday, May 5, 2013 at 4:30 a.m.

Last Modified: Friday, May 3, 2013 at 5:22 p.m.

A strong early childhood education and a healthy environment are, along with a sound economy, the most important legacy we can leave our children and future generations. North Carolina’s Republican leadership seems determined to undermine all three in a misguided stab at fiscal austerity.

First, there’s Gov. Pat McCrory’s proposed 2013-14 state budget. It would halve the number of teacher assistant positions in Henderson County Public Schools by reducing the funding for these positions by $2.27 million.

Under the worst-case scenario, county schools would lose 77 of 165 teacher assistant positions currently funded by the state, Superintendent David Jones told the school board Monday. The majority of those work in the county’s 13 elementary schools.

Jones made it clear the governor’s budget could still be changed by legislators. “It’s premature to take action until we know exactly what the budget is going to look like,” he said.

Perhaps, but it’s not too early for teachers and parents to start calling the governor’s office to explain what drastically cutting teacher assistant positions would do to the quality of education in our classrooms.

The governor’s budget places priority on “putting more teachers in the classrooms” and gives all districts full funding for teacher assistants in kindergarten and first grade, McCrory’s press secretary, Crystal Feldman, said. McCrory’s staff has said the budget provides enough flexibility for districts to use other funds for teacher assistants if they choose.

Those claims don’t add up, local school officials say. Cutting the current $4.88 million allotment for local teacher assistants by 46 percent would not result in more teachers but would reduce instructional help for students.

Teacher assistants could more accurately be called “teaching assistants” based on their role in today’s classrooms. They are critical to the quality of education in elementary grades, as staff writer Nathaniel Axtell showed in his report on this issue. Assistants work with students in small groups and one-on-one to help bolster teachers’ lessons. Geneé Dalton, a first-grade teacher at Edneyville Elementary, said she considers her half-time assistant, Marsha Keehan, an invaluable partner.

“My test scores are always exceptional, but it’s because I have exceptional help,” Dalton said. “We plan together, we teach together. I tell my students, ‘I expect you to treat her the way you treat me.’ Because we’re a team.”

We hope the governor’s budget is just the opening salvo in negotiations. North Carolina has made great strides over recent decades to assure that young children get a strong start. Deeply cutting funding for teacher assistants runs completely counter to that goal.

Along with giving kids a nurturing and supportive early childhood education, protecting our environment and quality of life is critical to building the kind of high-tech, information-based economy and clean industry that will assure North Carolina’s future success. But a GOP-sponsored bill that passed the N.C. Senate on Thursday would sacrifice locally based environmental protection rules on the bogus argument that doing so will create more jobs.

The bill requires cities, counties and state agencies to repeal or rewrite rules that go beyond federal law. It allows businesses or utilities with decommissioned buildings to dispose of waste on-site rather than transporting the material to a landfill, and it weakens standards to mitigate damage to wetlands.

One of the bill’s sponsors, Sen. Andrew Brock, R-Davie, says federal environmental laws already account for regional variations, and businesses find themselves forced to navigate a patchwork of laws that are constantly changing. “You had laws that were stifling businesses, and therefore stifling job creation,” he said.

Brock and other supporters of this misguided measure should back up such assertions with facts and numbers. What jobs are we losing, and how many, by allowing localities to write rules that fit local conditions and needs? A full cost-benefit analysis should include the businesses and industries that choose to locate in our state because of a healthy environment and the high quality of life that comes with it.

“Government closest to the governed” used to be a guiding principle of conservative philosophy. But today’s General Assembly acts as if forcing a top-down approach to minimize regulation will somehow open a floodgate of new economic development. Like cutting funding for teacher assistants in early grades, it’s a race to be bottom that’s likely to bring few short-term benefits but plenty of long-term consequences.

<p>A strong early childhood education and a healthy environment are, along with a sound economy, the most important legacy we can leave our children and future generations. North Carolina’s Republican leadership seems determined to undermine all three in a misguided stab at fiscal austerity.</p><p>First, there’s Gov. Pat McCrory’s proposed 2013-14 state budget. It would halve the number of teacher assistant positions in Henderson County Public Schools by reducing the funding for these positions by $2.27 million.</p><p>Under the worst-case scenario, county schools would lose 77 of 165 teacher assistant positions currently funded by the state, Superintendent David Jones told the school board Monday. The majority of those work in the county’s 13 elementary schools.</p><p>Jones made it clear the governor’s budget could still be changed by legislators. It’s premature to take action until we know exactly what the budget is going to look like, he said.</p><p>Perhaps, but it’s not too early for teachers and parents to start calling the governor’s office to explain what drastically cutting teacher assistant positions would do to the quality of education in our classrooms.</p><p>The governor’s budget places priority on putting more teachers in the classrooms and gives all districts full funding for teacher assistants in kindergarten and first grade, McCrory’s press secretary, Crystal Feldman, said. McCrory’s staff has said the budget provides enough flexibility for districts to use other funds for teacher assistants if they choose.</p><p>Those claims don’t add up, local school officials say. Cutting the current $4.88 million allotment for local teacher assistants by 46 percent would not result in more teachers but would reduce instructional help for students.</p><p>Teacher assistants could more accurately be called teaching assistants based on their role in today’s classrooms. They are critical to the quality of education in elementary grades, as staff writer Nathaniel Axtell showed in his report on this issue. Assistants work with students in small groups and one-on-one to help bolster teachers’ lessons. Geneé Dalton, a first-grade teacher at Edneyville Elementary, said she considers her half-time assistant, Marsha Keehan, an invaluable partner.</p><p>My test scores are always exceptional, but it’s because I have exceptional help, Dalton said. We plan together, we teach together. I tell my students, I expect you to treat her the way you treat me.’ Because we’re a team.</p><p>We hope the governor’s budget is just the opening salvo in negotiations. North Carolina has made great strides over recent decades to assure that young children get a strong start. Deeply cutting funding for teacher assistants runs completely counter to that goal.</p><p>Along with giving kids a nurturing and supportive early childhood education, protecting our environment and quality of life is critical to building the kind of high-tech, information-based economy and clean industry that will assure North Carolina’s future success. But a GOP-sponsored bill that passed the N.C. Senate on Thursday would sacrifice locally based environmental protection rules on the bogus argument that doing so will create more jobs.</p><p>The bill requires cities, counties and state agencies to repeal or rewrite rules that go beyond federal law. It allows businesses or utilities with decommissioned buildings to dispose of waste on-site rather than transporting the material to a landfill, and it weakens standards to mitigate damage to wetlands.</p><p>One of the bill’s sponsors, Sen. Andrew Brock, R-Davie, says federal environmental laws already account for regional variations, and businesses find themselves forced to navigate a patchwork of laws that are constantly changing. You had laws that were stifling businesses, and therefore stifling job creation, he said.</p><p>Brock and other supporters of this misguided measure should back up such assertions with facts and numbers. What jobs are we losing, and how many, by allowing localities to write rules that fit local conditions and needs? A full cost-benefit analysis should include the businesses and industries that choose to locate in our state because of a healthy environment and the high quality of life that comes with it.</p><p>Government closest to the governed used to be a guiding principle of conservative philosophy. But today’s General Assembly acts as if forcing a top-down approach to minimize regulation will somehow open a floodgate of new economic development. Like cutting funding for teacher assistants in early grades, it’s a race to be bottom that’s likely to bring few short-term benefits but plenty of long-term consequences.</p>